CEM Benchmarking Releases Direct Comparative Study on Defined Benefit Pension Fund Performance and Costs
CEM
Benchmarking Releases Direct Comparative Study on Defined Benefit Pension Fund
Performance and Costs
Source: REIT.com, 10/14/2014 | By Ron Kuykendall
CEM
Benchmarking Inc.,
an independent provider of cost and performance analysis for pension funds,
endowments, foundations and sovereign wealth funds, and NAREIT, the National
Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts®, announced a new study by CEM on U.S. pension fund performance and investment
costs. CEM’s findings provide direct comparative insights for defined
benefit (DB) pension funds that seek to better understand realized investment
returns and management fees for 12 different asset classes, including
traditional stock and bond funds and alternative assets, including real estate.
“Concern
about the adequacy of pension funding has focused attention on investment
performance and fees,” said Alexander D. Beath, PhD, author of the CEM study.
“The data underscore that when it comes to long-term net returns, costs matter
and allocations matter.”
The
study is based on actual return and fee data provided by more than 300 U.S. DB
plans from the CEM database with $2.8 trillion of assets under management. It
analyzes the period 1998 through 2011, during which a fundamental change
occurred in the DB market, as represented by the pension plans included in the
study, which increased their investments in alternative assets – private equity
and hedge funds, real estate and other real assets such as commodities and
infrastructure – by nearly 400 percent on average. CEM used its extensive
databases to examine how this reallocation to alternatives paid off in terms of
gross returns and realized returns net of fees charged by investment managers.
“Many
pension plans could have improved performance by choosing different allocation
strategies and optimizing their management fees,” Beath continued. “Listed equity REITs delivered higher net total returns than any other
alternative asset class for the fourteen-year period we analyzed, driven by
high and stable dividend payouts, long-term capital appreciation and a
significantly lower fee structure compared to private equity and private real
estate funds.”
Highlights
of the study, “Asset Allocation and Fund Performance of Defined Benefit Pension
Funds in the United States Between 1998-2011,” include:
Listed equity REITs were the top-performing asset class overall in terms of net total
returns over this period. .Private equity had a higher gross return on average
than listed REITs (13.31 percent vs 11.82 percent) but charged fees nearly five
times higher on average than REITs (238.3 basis points or 2.38 percent of gross
returns for private equity versus 51.6 basis points or 0.52 percent for
REITs). As a result, listed equity REITs realized a
net return of 11.31 percent vs. 11.10 percent for private equity. Net
returns for other real assets, including commodities and infrastructure, were
9.85 percent on average. Net returns for private real estate were 7.61
percent, and hedge funds returned 4.77 percent. On a net basis, REITs also
outperformed large cap stocks (6.06 percent) on average and U.S. long duration
bonds (8.97 percent).
Many plans could have improved performance by choosing different
portfolio allocations.
CEM used the information on realized net returns to estimate the marginal
benefit that would have resulted from a one percentage point increase in
allocation to the various asset classes. Increasing the allocations to
long-duration fixed income, listed equity REITs and other
real assets would have had the largest positive impacts on plan
performance. For example, for a typical plan with $15 billion in assets
under management, each one percentage point increase in allocations to listed equity REITs would have boosted total net returns by $180
million over the time period studied.
Allocations changed
considerably on average from 1998 through 2011. Of the DB plans
analyzed by CEM, public pension plans reduced allocations to stocks by 8.5
percentage points and to bonds by 6.6 percentage points while increasing the
allocation to alternative assets, including real estate, by 15.1 percentage
points. Corporate plans reduced stock allocations by 19.1 percentage
points while increasing allocations to fixed income by 10.5 percentage points
(consistent with a shift to liability driven investment strategies), and to
alternative assets by 8.6 percentage points. For the DB market as a
whole, allocations to stocks decreased 15.1 percentage points; fixed income
allocations increased by 4.3 percentage points; and allocations to alternatives
increased by 10.8 percentage points. In dollar terms, total investment in
alternatives for the 300 funds in the study increased from approximately $125
billion to nearly $600 billion over the study period.
DISCLAIMER: This blog/article has
been curated from an alternate source and is designed for informational
purposes to highlight the commercial real estate market. It solely represents
the opinion of the specific blogger/author and does not necessarily represent
the opinion of Pacific Coast Commercial. www.PacificCoastCommercial.com
Keywords: San
Diego Commercial Real Estate For Sale, Commercial Property In San Diego, Commercial
Real Estate In San Diego, San Diego Investment Real Estate, Commercial Property
Management In San Diego, San Diego Commercial Property Management, Commercial
Property Management San Diego, Managed Commercial Property San Diego,
Commercial Property For Sale San Diego, San Diego Commercial Real Estate
Leasing
Comments
Post a Comment